14 "I am the good shepherd, and I know My own and My own know Me,
15 even as the Father knows Me and I know the Father; and I lay down My life for the sheep.
16 "I have other sheep, which are not of this fold; I must bring them also, and they will hear My voice; and they will become one flock with one shepherd.
17 "For this reason the Father loves Me,because I lay down My life so that I may take it again.
18 "No one has taken it away from Me, but I lay it down on My own initiative. I have authority to lay it down, and I have authority to take it up again. This commandment I received from My Father." (the gospel according to John, chapter ten. Generally, it is acknowledged and admitted that Jesus died; that he gave up his life. This is the quick, easy sharing point. What sometimes follows from this sharing point may be either the affirmation of the deity of Jesus or the denial of the deity of Jesus. This, too, from faithful Christians.
the prophecy of Ezekiel
The above passage from the book of John is a simple, but profound declaration spoken by Jesus. It is an example of what is often parroted by some, not to affirm, but as just another proof-text to support their denial of the deity claims which Jesus made of himself, namely, because he died. Jesus declared these words as a mere concept of a shepherd. The concept itself comes from the prophecy of Ezekiel 34. It is there that the Lord God distinguished himself as a shepherd who cares for, searches for and gathers his sheep, not like the shepherds of Israel who had forsaken the sheep; the children of Israel who had been entrusted to their care. The reason why I refer to it as a concept is because what Jesus declared was vastly and radically different than the reality of a faithful shepherd much less the faithless and unfaithful shepherds.
Jesus, the good shepherd
It is likely that the reference by Jesus to the shepherd from the book of the prophet Ezekiel resonated as familiar to his Jewish listeners. However, the description which Jesus gives of himself as the good shepherd far exceeded the prophetic message of Ezekiel. Jesus the good shepherd indeed cares for his sheep, he searches for his sheep, but Jesus
lays down his life for his sheep.
God raised him up
Why and how is it that this ultimate act of love by Jesus of laying down his life for which the Father loves him results in the minds of some saints as the denial of the deity of Jesus? Here again there is a simple, but profound message reiterated by by the apostle Peter Acts 2:32, Acts 10:39-40 and the apostle Paul in Acts 13:30-33, namely, that God raised up Jesus. The reason why some saints are baffled and confounded about this and the reason for which they are quick to deny the deity of Jesus is because their human reasoning raises up in their mind what is a quandary and contradiction for them: how can God raise himself up from the dead? The quick, short answer is that it is for the same reason that God swears by himself because there is no one greater. There is no one greater than God to raise up God from the dead, but there is more.
The biblical answer was articulated by Jesus himself when he declared that he would take up his own life from the dead again. There is a problem which is created by some saints who are primarily driven by a well-intentioned, but mistaken theology. Then, in order to shore up that theology they resort to regarding the Acts 2, 10 and 13 passages above as -the Father raised up Jesus - rather than work through the full understanding of the written word and what it attests, namely, that it states it was God who did the raising. The fact is that the apostle Paul did state that it was the Father who raised Jesus from the dead. It is interesting that those who substitute the term Father for God in the expression “God raised him up from the dead” do not reference this text probably because it is easier to make the assertion than to uphold the testimony of the scriptures. It is significant that Jesus stated that for him to alone testify of himself would make his testimony not true. The reason he states why he does not need to testify of himself is because of the abundance of testimony concerning himself. There is the witness of John the baptist, the works, the Father and the scriptures. Even so, he stated that if he testified of himself that his testimony is true because he knows where he came from and where he is going. Hence, the testimony Jesus made about laying down his own life and taking up his own life up from the dead is as true as it is that the Father raised him from the dead. The apostle Paul’s claim is hardly a negation of the claim made by Jesus.
The clarification, even if it is rejected, was made by Jesus himself. It was Jesus who declared that it was he, that is, Jesus who raised himself up from the dead and which is confirmed and corroborated by Luke the author of the book of Acts as being God. What Luke and Paul’s claims reflect is the unity and oneness which Jesus always assert with the Father. Much of the surgical attempts to dissect and separate and distinguish between Father and Son and deity and non-deity is akin to separating Lord God such as Lord from God with the former being non-deity and the latter being deity. Again, it is akin to dissecting and separating belief in the Father from unbelief in the Son as something which pleases or glorifies the Father. Even more, Jesus made the claim that it is he who will raise up those who believe in him in the last day. I can understand if this is more difficult to accept than to understand, but let the readers judge for themselves if this is not what the scripture states.
God can’t die
Says who? This is the loud bluster heard in response to the assertion that God died. What greater demonstration of his power can the Creator, Giver, and Sustainer of life perform in complete and utter defiance of Satan’s lie to Adam and Eve than to lay down his own life and then take it up again? The death of God was not one of weakness, but of his own will to submit to death only to defeat it.
It is amazing to engage in a discussion on this topic because despite all the clarifications that God died, (past tense) NOT THAT HE IS DEAD (present tense) discussion participants often blithely will seize and distort the message and purport to defend against a claim that is not in discussion. They will continue to argue that God is not dead even though that never was nor is it now the message in discussion. Yet, it is the writer of Hebrews who makes the claim of the death of Jesus and the effect of his death to destroy the one who HAD the power of death. This, too, is what Jesus asserted, namely, that death, the ruler of this world, has nothing on him. Death, Jesus revealed, has nothing on him. It is in the palm of his hand. He lays down his life at-will and he takes up his life at-will as he pleases.
This quandary is not limited to those brothers and sisters who mistakenly deny the death of God much less the deity of Jesus. It is heard among those who do assert his deity even while they, too, assert that God can’t die. So how do they work around this theological quandary? This is how and why the contrived doctrine of “the God part of Jesus” and “the human part of Jesus” emerged. The workaround to the question of God dying even while professing the deity of Jesus is to declare that it was “the human part of Jesus” that died. What this doctrine exposes is an unbelief in what Christians profess, namely, that death is not the end. Why then and what is the problem if God chose to submit himself to death in the grave for a mere three days? What is three days for a God who is bound by neither space nor time and no more than a blink of the eye?
a numeric quantification
What is at the heart of the problem concerning the understanding of deity is a numbers game box. This is the box in which so-called unitarians as much as so-called trinitarians have dropped themselves. They are as oblivious as can be that they have both quantified the expression “one” as it appears in the Shema in Deuteronomy 6, The Lord is our God. The Lord is ONE. The efforts by so-called unitarians to cite the quotation of Jesus of the Shema such as in Mark 12 as a prooftext that Jesus was not a so-called trinitarian is as dire as the same numeric quantification of three or one which they have ascribed to the term one. What is completely overlooked (probably because verse 4 is the only verse that is read) is the inter-generational message from God to Moses for Israel on the unity, harmony and oneness of the message on the revelation of the will of God. This inter-generational admonition for Israel to heed and obey the commandment of the Lord God was to hold true of what God said, what Moses said, what the prophets said, what Jesus said, what the apostles said, and what the saints in Christ read from the written revelation of the word of the Lord God.
I, a man
It is only fair to address the outcry of some saints about Jesus as man. Yes, Jesus referred to himself as a man. The Jews referred to him as a man. The apostle Paul referred to him as a man.
Jesus fully engaged with his Jewish audience. They were obstinate and stubborn to every word which he spoke to them. It was in the midst of one such engagement that Jesus referred to himself as a man. Is this to be taken this as a theological assertion or admission by Jesus so as to deny his deity? Not anymore than Jesus was admitting that he was a winebibber and glutton to the false, maligning, aspersion made against him. Not anymore than to concede that he was nothing more than a prophet, as the people (and no small number of scholars and theologians, today) perceived him to be according to a common misunderstanding of the Deuteronomy 18, because Jesus was no more a prophet than Moses according to how God defined what constitutes a prophet.
As mentioned above the Jews regarded Jews as just an ordinary man. This seems human enough. It is also what Jesus admonished them about them judging according to outward appearance.
The apostle Paul referred to Jesus as a man in the above verse. Luke uses the same term for man, or a male, of Cornelius [1] as well as of Simon,[2] the sorcerer. The term which Paul uses is a different term. It is the same term used by Jesus of himself and which the Jews use of Jesus when they refer to him as a man. It is the term related to mankind, not of male. The use of this term by the Jews fits and reflects their unbelief and disdain for message of Jesus. What they asserted to him was, essentially, you are just one of us, one of mankind.
One other significant reason as to why Paul may possibly have used that term of Jesus is totally ignored by those who lead, teach and preach as well as scholars and theologians. Paul directed his letter to Timothy. He was ministering in the work which Paul had started earlier under the virtual shadow of the temple of female-dominant cult of Artemis in Ephesus. Artemis touted herself as savior of women. Jesus, Paul asserts, is the savior of not only women, but all mankind, or of all men as the English text reads in the NASB.
summary
The prophecy of Ezekiel is of the Lord Godhimself coming to care and gather for his sheep. Jesus claimed to be the good shepherd. Jesus claimed to be the fulfillment of this prophecy. He would do these things for his sheep, but Jesus took the prophecy much farther. He would lay down his life for his sheep. Then, he would take up his life again. This is not in the same category or mold as a prophet raising a dead person from the dead. This was an exertion of divine power and it was what Jesus said he would do. This testimony is reiterated by Luke when he boldly proclaims that it was God who raised Jesus from the dead. There is nothing about the claims concerning the deity of Jesus which rests on a single verse or single word definition in isolation. The apostle Paul, even as he states that the Father raised Jesus from the dead, was not dubious or coy about his numerous assertions and references to Jesus as God. Those are abundant and are available for the reader in the writings of the apostle Paul in the New Testament.
No comments:
Post a Comment